I’ve made $66,000 so far this year w0rking 0nline and I’m a full time student. I’m using an 0nline business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great m0ney. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it… www.iⅭash68.ⅭOⅯ
"The big question mark is the fact that all the K versions of the CPUs are supported, however when asked why these are supported and about overclocking, Intel seemed confused and contradicted itself, stating that overclocking wasn’t on these CPUs."
Maybe the VPro version of the K chips just have higher clocks and power levels. If so, I expect some consumers will end up getting burned by accidentally buying the VPro version.
Hopefully not being able to enable VPro and Overclocking at the same time is purely a software lock in the chipset firmware or CPU microcode.
Intel added vPro support for the K line in the 8th generation. But historically vPro also required specific chipset (usually Q, not the OC enabling Z), network controller, and BIOS. So OC was not really on the table because of how Intel segmented the market: vPro on upper-mid-range systems that end up in enterprise environments where OC is irrelevant. I've personally seen vPro working exclusively on OEM systems and on Intel's own motherboards.
There's no real change from the model used in previous gen CPUs, it's about market segmentation defined via chipset. Bringing the support to all chipsets now seems aimed at OEMs as very few end users are preoccupied with this. OEMs will be able to push this feature over the whole price spectrum, high and low-end, rather than the usual upper-middle.
Pretty sure Ian and Intel PR got their wires crossed on this one. ARK and the vPro / SIPP pages on Intel’s site pretty clearly show only the usual suspects as supporting vPro, not the entire line of 400 Series PCHs.
i would pay 1000 $ extra for my PC to not have these backdoors. how stupid does intel think we are? a feature that absolutely nobody asked for in gaming/consumer PCs. full of intentional and unintentional security backdoors that they are not really going to fix or maintain.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
11 Comments
Back to Article
yeeeeman - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
If Intel would have lowered the price on 10900K to 300-350$, it would sell like hotcakes.schujj07 - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
Well with how hot it is going to run that isn't wrong.mrvco - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
They should just own it and ship the review units in a box of pancake batter.schujj07 - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
Could be used as a replacement for the 100W incandescent build in an Easy Bake Oven.katherinedmathis50 - Friday, May 29, 2020 - link
I’ve made $66,000 so far this year w0rking 0nline and I’m a full time student. I’m using an 0nline business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great m0ney. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it… www.iⅭash68.ⅭOⅯDanNeely - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
"The big question mark is the fact that all the K versions of the CPUs are supported, however when asked why these are supported and about overclocking, Intel seemed confused and contradicted itself, stating that overclocking wasn’t on these CPUs."Maybe the VPro version of the K chips just have higher clocks and power levels. If so, I expect some consumers will end up getting burned by accidentally buying the VPro version.
Hopefully not being able to enable VPro and Overclocking at the same time is purely a software lock in the chipset firmware or CPU microcode.
close - Friday, May 15, 2020 - link
Intel added vPro support for the K line in the 8th generation. But historically vPro also required specific chipset (usually Q, not the OC enabling Z), network controller, and BIOS. So OC was not really on the table because of how Intel segmented the market: vPro on upper-mid-range systems that end up in enterprise environments where OC is irrelevant. I've personally seen vPro working exclusively on OEM systems and on Intel's own motherboards.There's no real change from the model used in previous gen CPUs, it's about market segmentation defined via chipset. Bringing the support to all chipsets now seems aimed at OEMs as very few end users are preoccupied with this. OEMs will be able to push this feature over the whole price spectrum, high and low-end, rather than the usual upper-middle.
repoman27 - Friday, May 15, 2020 - link
Pretty sure Ian and Intel PR got their wires crossed on this one. ARK and the vPro / SIPP pages on Intel’s site pretty clearly show only the usual suspects as supporting vPro, not the entire line of 400 Series PCHs.azfacea - Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - link
i would pay 1000 $ extra for my PC to not have these backdoors. how stupid does intel think we are? a feature that absolutely nobody asked for in gaming/consumer PCs. full of intentional and unintentional security backdoors that they are not really going to fix or maintain.fuck you intel.
repoman27 - Thursday, May 14, 2020 - link
Pretty sure the vPro PCH SKUs are:Q470
Q470E
QM480
WM490
These are the only 400 Series SKUs listed on ARK as having vPro support and are listed as eligible components on Intel’s SIPP page: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architectu...
repoman27 - Thursday, May 14, 2020 - link
Oops, I missed W480 and W480E, which are vPro eligible but not SIPP.